Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
Nature itself teaches that for a man to wear long hair is a shame to him. The shame lies in wearing the hair dressed and arranged in ornamental tresses after the manner natural to women, with great pains to adorn the self, not in any fixed length or parting laid down as a binding rule. The next verse gives the woman's long hair as her glory and as a natural covering given to her, so that she has a covering in her hair itself. Paul uses this natural distinction to press the ordinance of the head covering and modest propriety under divine order, rather than making hair the chapter's main subject. Apart from the passing customs at Corinth, what abides is modesty, reverence, seemly and orderly worship, simplicity, and distinction between the sexes in dress, without making hair length a test of fellowship.
Words, Custom and Setting
Nature itself teaches that long hair on a man is a shame to him. That appeal to what is natural marks long hair on a man as shameful and uses the natural distinction about hair to illustrate the argument about head coverings rather than making hair itself the primary subject of the chapter. The instruction belongs to proper conduct in public worship and prayer, where men who pray or preach publicly should have uncovered heads and moderately short hair.
The phrase for having long hair does not mean mere length or a particular parting, but wearing the hair as dressed and arranged tresses for ornament in the manner natural to women. It is hair dressed in the way women dress it, with great pains taken to adorn the self, and that effeminate adornment is the shame to a man. By itself it lays no binding rule on any man as to whether he should wear his hair long or short.
Men are left to ordinary usage and good sense to wear the hair in the ordinary way men do, as more comfortable and cleanly, generally moderately short. Nazarites let theirs grow uncut under the instruction the Lord gave for Nazarites, which this verse does not refer to and does not set aside. In ancient times men did not cut the hair as frequently as now, as Absalom with wonderful abundance of hair cut it at least once a year. It is not revealed and not essential whether Jesus wore long hair while on earth as one regarded as separated to God like a Nazarite under a perpetual vow, so the verse has nothing to do with deciding whether Jesus wore long hair.
The instruction responds to ancient customs and disorderly practices addressed to the Corinthians, rather than binding Christians to a particular way of wearing the hair. Dress in Grecian cities was different from Judea where men themselves were covered, and the appeal is not to a particular law but to what is decent and proper and reverent. At that time long hair symbolized virtue while short hair signified the opposite, and for a woman to have her hair cut was a punishment for crime and a mark of disgrace. That custom has passed away and does not determine how hair should be worn today, while the lasting lesson is modesty, reverence, seemly behavior, simplicity, and a distinction between the sexes in dress.
The natural distinction about hair illustrates the argument about head coverings, where believers are praised for keeping the ordinances as delivered to them. Perverting an ordinance by not preserving it pure according to its intention is strongly blamed, showing that divine ordinances are no light thing to trifle with. Both candidate and administrator must look well to the teachings of the gospel, with he who administers them improperly doing so at his peril.
Covering, Order and Christian Life
The next verse sets long hair on a woman as her glory and as a natural covering given to her, so that a woman with long hair has a covering in her hair itself. For a woman to cut off her hair like a man is indecorous, and to put away the head covering like a man is similarly indecorous. In that setting a woman with short hair should cover her head, while a woman with long hair should still add the head covering to show of her own will what nature teaches she ought to do, in token of her subjection to man. The head covering keeps the modest propriety that becomes her under the divine ordinance, as the emblem of maiden modesty before man and of conjugal chastity, so that to uncover the head indicates withdrawal from the power of the husband.
What endures beyond the particular Corinthian customs of dress is modesty, reverence, seemly and decently orderly worship, simplicity, and a distinction between the sexes in dress. The call in all ages is to glorify God modestly rather than to insist on a hard and fast law of head covering or hairstyle. Hair length is not a test of fellowship, though some styles are more becoming and appropriate, with long hair more becoming for a woman and short hair more becoming for a man. Men who pray or preach publicly should have uncovered heads and moderately short hair.
The chapter gives specific directions for women praying and prophesying, where prophesying means speaking and exhorting for the comfort and edification of the church. This proves that 1 Corinthians 14 does not forbid women to speak or to bear public testimony at all. Women may pray and speak in social and prayer meetings and may bear testimony for Christ, help in His work, and proclaim His truth in womanly Christian ways when appearing as the apostle directs. That appearing requires true modest and humble conduct that does not usurp authority over man or over the church, but is willing to learn from those best fitted to fill important positions. Paul's directions here do not conflict with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, which corrects only blameworthy disorders of contradicting, altercating, asking questions, disputing, being out of place, and assuming authority to teach and rule.
Paul corrects lack of proper decorum when they came together, meaning Christian women must not imitate the manners of Gentile females in dress and conduct regarding the head and hair but must maintain modest, orderly decorum. This belongs with his correction of selfish feasting while others hungered, so that they were not truly celebrating the Lord's Supper and failed to discern the Lord's body. The wider passage confirms that sin brought disparagement between husband and wife, the wife's desire to her husband and the husband ruling over her. Before sin Adam and Eve bore God's moral image equally and lived in harmony as one flesh, with the wife as an equal helpmeet standing by the husband's side, and after sin that equality was marred by the husband's rule. Marriage and the Sabbath were both given before the fall, so they call the mind back to God's original plan of unity and equality for husband and wife, and the Sabbath cannot be kept properly in any family where husband and wife live in discord. Nature's teaching of divine order is likewise applied to marriage as God's order for home, church and State reflecting Christ's relation to the church, including that a bishop should be the husband of one wife. The Chinese queue is that kind of shameful long hair on a man, so the falling off of the queues is a good and welcome change.
Nature itself teaches that for a man to wear long hair is a shame to him. The shame lies in wearing the hair dressed and arranged in ornamental tresses after the manner natural to women, with great pains to adorn the self, not in any fixed length or parting laid down as a binding rule. The next verse gives the woman's long hair as her glory and as a natural covering given to her, so that she has a covering in her hair itself. Paul uses this natural distinction to press the ordinance of the head covering and modest propriety under divine order, rather than making hair the chapter's main subject. Apart from the passing customs at Corinth, what abides is modesty, reverence, seemly and orderly worship, simplicity, and distinction between the sexes in dress, without making hair length a test of fellowship.
Words, Custom and Setting
Nature itself teaches that long hair on a man is a shame to him. That appeal to what is natural marks long hair on a man as shameful and uses the natural distinction about hair to illustrate the argument about head coverings rather than making hair itself the primary subject of the chapter. The instruction belongs to proper conduct in public worship and prayer, where men who pray or preach publicly should have uncovered heads and moderately short hair.
The phrase for having long hair does not mean mere length or a particular parting, but wearing the hair as dressed and arranged tresses for ornament in the manner natural to women. It is hair dressed in the way women dress it, with great pains taken to adorn the self, and that effeminate adornment is the shame to a man. By itself it lays no binding rule on any man as to whether he should wear his hair long or short.
Men are left to ordinary usage and good sense to wear the hair in the ordinary way men do, as more comfortable and cleanly, generally moderately short. Nazarites let theirs grow uncut under the instruction the Lord gave for Nazarites, which this verse does not refer to and does not set aside. In ancient times men did not cut the hair as frequently as now, as Absalom with wonderful abundance of hair cut it at least once a year. It is not revealed and not essential whether Jesus wore long hair while on earth as one regarded as separated to God like a Nazarite under a perpetual vow, so the verse has nothing to do with deciding whether Jesus wore long hair.
The instruction responds to ancient customs and disorderly practices addressed to the Corinthians, rather than binding Christians to a particular way of wearing the hair. Dress in Grecian cities was different from Judea where men themselves were covered, and the appeal is not to a particular law but to what is decent and proper and reverent. At that time long hair symbolized virtue while short hair signified the opposite, and for a woman to have her hair cut was a punishment for crime and a mark of disgrace. That custom has passed away and does not determine how hair should be worn today, while the lasting lesson is modesty, reverence, seemly behavior, simplicity, and a distinction between the sexes in dress.
The natural distinction about hair illustrates the argument about head coverings, where believers are praised for keeping the ordinances as delivered to them. Perverting an ordinance by not preserving it pure according to its intention is strongly blamed, showing that divine ordinances are no light thing to trifle with. Both candidate and administrator must look well to the teachings of the gospel, with he who administers them improperly doing so at his peril.
Covering, Order and Christian Life
The next verse sets long hair on a woman as her glory and as a natural covering given to her, so that a woman with long hair has a covering in her hair itself. For a woman to cut off her hair like a man is indecorous, and to put away the head covering like a man is similarly indecorous. In that setting a woman with short hair should cover her head, while a woman with long hair should still add the head covering to show of her own will what nature teaches she ought to do, in token of her subjection to man. The head covering keeps the modest propriety that becomes her under the divine ordinance, as the emblem of maiden modesty before man and of conjugal chastity, so that to uncover the head indicates withdrawal from the power of the husband.
What endures beyond the particular Corinthian customs of dress is modesty, reverence, seemly and decently orderly worship, simplicity, and a distinction between the sexes in dress. The call in all ages is to glorify God modestly rather than to insist on a hard and fast law of head covering or hairstyle. Hair length is not a test of fellowship, though some styles are more becoming and appropriate, with long hair more becoming for a woman and short hair more becoming for a man. Men who pray or preach publicly should have uncovered heads and moderately short hair.
The chapter gives specific directions for women praying and prophesying, where prophesying means speaking and exhorting for the comfort and edification of the church. This proves that 1 Corinthians 14 does not forbid women to speak or to bear public testimony at all. Women may pray and speak in social and prayer meetings and may bear testimony for Christ, help in His work, and proclaim His truth in womanly Christian ways when appearing as the apostle directs. That appearing requires true modest and humble conduct that does not usurp authority over man or over the church, but is willing to learn from those best fitted to fill important positions. Paul's directions here do not conflict with 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, which corrects only blameworthy disorders of contradicting, altercating, asking questions, disputing, being out of place, and assuming authority to teach and rule.
Paul corrects lack of proper decorum when they came together, meaning Christian women must not imitate the manners of Gentile females in dress and conduct regarding the head and hair but must maintain modest, orderly decorum. This belongs with his correction of selfish feasting while others hungered, so that they were not truly celebrating the Lord's Supper and failed to discern the Lord's body. The wider passage confirms that sin brought disparagement between husband and wife, the wife's desire to her husband and the husband ruling over her. Before sin Adam and Eve bore God's moral image equally and lived in harmony as one flesh, with the wife as an equal helpmeet standing by the husband's side, and after sin that equality was marred by the husband's rule. Marriage and the Sabbath were both given before the fall, so they call the mind back to God's original plan of unity and equality for husband and wife, and the Sabbath cannot be kept properly in any family where husband and wife live in discord. Nature's teaching of divine order is likewise applied to marriage as God's order for home, church and State reflecting Christ's relation to the church, including that a bishop should be the husband of one wife. The Chinese queue is that kind of shameful long hair on a man, so the falling off of the queues is a good and welcome change.